It's not as much as I hoped from my Senator, but it's better than nothing. It's also my understanding that Sen. Kerry has called for a cease-fire as well. Here's part of Leahy's statement:
"...While hundreds of Hezbollah’s missiles continue to rain down on Israel, Israel’s military response has also caused the deaths of hundreds of civilians in Lebanon, including four United Nations observers. One of the latest tragedies is the destruction by an Israeli missile of an apartment building in Qana that resulted in 57 Lebanese deaths including 34 children, children who were not terrorists.
Secretary Rice’s whirlwind visits to the region have been welcome but they have produced few tangible results. This type of crisis diplomacy rarely achieves lasting solutions. She is also occupied with a widening civil war in Iraq, resurgent Taliban violence in Afghanistan, an increasingly recalcitrant and aggressive regime in North Korea, a worsening humanitarian crisis in Darfur with no end in sight, the specter of a nuclear-weapons-capable Iran in the world’s future, and other pressing problems. She is simply unable to focus the sustained, high-level attention on the Middle East crisis that is needed.
I and others like my friend from Nebraska, Senator Hagel, have urged President Bush to appoint a special envoy with the stature and the authority to work on a continual basis to help broker an immediate ceasefire and long term solutions to Israel’s conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah – someone who wakes up every single day with the challenge, the portfolio and especially the authority to help resolve this conflict. I renew this call for such an envoy again today.
Some U.S. officials have questioned the possibility of a ceasefire with a terrorist organization like Hezbollah. That is a valid question, but ceasefires have been achieved with other terrorist groups, and while imperfect the results have been sharp reductions in violence.
A ceasefire is needed immediately in Lebanon, to be followed with similar urgency by the deployment of an international peacekeeping force on the border. Too many innocent people are dying – innocent people -- in both countries. A peacekeeping force is necessary to prevent further loss of Lebanese and Israeli lives.
We are committed to protecting Israel’s security and we support Israel’s right of self defense, including going after Hezbollah fighters who often launch their attacks from civilian areas.
But for Israel’s sake, for ours and especially – especially -- for the sake of innocent lives on both sides of these battle lines, it is vitally important to ask whether destroying Lebanon – not Hezbollah, but destroying Lebanon -- will make Israel more secure or instead rally Muslims behind Hezbollah and give rise to further hatred and insecurity. I believe that continued bombing of civilian areas in Lebanon will not destroy Hezbollah, but in a perverse way, it may strengthen it.
The fact that these attacks are being carried out with such intensity and are yielding so much death and destruction, with weapons supplied by the United States, and at a time when we are trying to repair our already frayed relations with Muslims around the world, is all the more reason for the United States and the people of Israel to consider and answer this question frankly and honestly. I am concerned, as others have also warned, that a short-term tactical victory – even if possible – could prove to be a hollow victory at great human cost.
We should also reflect on the circumstances that preceded this crisis. For the past five years, the Bush Administration’s approach to the Middle East has been either to ignore it or to parachute in for just enough time for a few handshakes and photographs. There has never been an effective strategy. They have never been willing to expend any political capital. Their policy toward Syria and Iran has been erratic and ineffective. Their relations with the Palestinians have stagnated.
It was clear since the earliest days of this Administration that this laxity would define their approach to these tinderbox issues, and the terrible harm of that approach – to our ally Israel, to the Palestinians, and to the prospects for resuming a meaningful peace process in that region – is all the more clear today.
I am not among those who believe that the United States pulls all the strings in the Middle East. There are forces there over which we have only limited influence.
But neither do I believe there can be a lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict without the active, creative and sustained engagement of the United States, including direct talks with those with whom we strongly disagree, like Syria and Iran. That has been sorely lacking under this Administration, and we are witnessing the price of that neglect in Lebanon and Israel today."
Mods: I don't believe this is copywrited material.
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200608/080106.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
